Has anyone been running with DGM payout for several months at least? Does it ever really balance out?I have tried DGM and it seems to pay out significantly less than PPS.One long round (6+hrs) looks like it will months before it can be made up. Forget about 10+ hr rounds..

Has anyone been running with DGM payout for several months at least? Does it ever really balance out?I have tried DGM and it seems to pay out significantly less than PPS.One long round (6+hrs) looks like it will months before it can be made up. Forget about 10+ hr rounds..

It's supposed to balance out in the long run, as DGM will have good streaks and bad streaks.

Has anyone been running with DGM payout for several months at least? Does it ever really balance out?I have tried DGM and it seems to pay out significantly less than PPS.One long round (6+hrs) looks like it will months before it can be made up. Forget about 10+ hr rounds..

If you have trouble deciding which one to choose, just divide your hash rate. For a single rig, just create 2 workers (one as DGM and one as PPS) and use cgminer's load balancing feature. The problem is if you use other pools as backup, that backup will also get used at the same time. Better to use this if you have more than one rig.

You can also try using 2 instances of cgminer using -d option. Example, rig have 2 cards installed. Create 2 shortcuts to cgminer. One will have -d 0 and the other one will have -d 1. For 4 cards, one will have -d 0 -d 1 and the other one will have -d 2 -d 3. I haven't tried this method with the newer versions of cgminer though so I don't know if it still work.

DGM makes you more money, because proportional is subject to hopping and a 3% fee.

Assuming everything is working properly, the pool is working as intended, and the pool doesn't get a never ending bad luck streak, in the long run DGM will do better.

PPS will give you a steady payout, however, and is not subject to variance.

M

If you're assuming no fees, then PPS and DGM (and PPLNS when correctly implemented) all have the same expected value per share. So in the long run, they will pay out the same. To compare long term payout, just subtract any fees. The difference is in expected variance. PPS pools have no variance - you get the same amount per share. DGM and PPLNS have variance that can be tuned using their parameters. I seem to remember that Ozcoin's parameters are tuned to minimise variance for miners, making it a good pool to mine at if you want to reduce variance.

Keep in mind that pools need fees or donations in order to keep running - they do you the service of pooling your shares with others to reduce the variance you'd get from solo mining. PPS payouts require more of a fee since they reduce your variance to zero and take that risk on themselves.

Any proportional payout system - pure proportional, or exponential proportional like Slush's pool and BTCMine - have expected share values that range from above 1.0 to below 1.0, so if you mine when expected share values are higher and cease mining when they are lower you earn more than expected. This is called pool hopping, and the extra coins the pool hopper earns comes from the pockets of full time miners. It is also why you shouldn't mine at proportional pools - unless you know how much pool hoppers take from the pool and don't mind losing a few percent.

DGM makes you more money, because proportional is subject to hopping and a 3% fee.

Assuming everything is working properly, the pool is working as intended, and the pool doesn't get a never ending bad luck streak, in the long run DGM will do better.

PPS will give you a steady payout, however, and is not subject to variance.

M

If you're assuming no fees, then PPS and DGM (and PPLNS when correctly implemented) all have the same expected value per share. So in the long run, they will pay out the same. To compare long term payout, just subtract any fees. The difference is in expected variance. PPS pools have no variance - you get the same amount per share. DGM and PPLNS have variance that can be tuned using their parameters. I seem to remember that Ozcoin's parameters are tuned to minimise variance for miners, making it a good pool to mine at if you want to reduce variance.

Keep in mind that pools need fees or donations in order to keep running - they do you the service of pooling your shares with others to reduce the variance you'd get from solo mining. PPS payouts require more of a fee since they reduce your variance to zero and take that risk on themselves.

Any proportional payout system - pure proportional, or exponential proportional like Slush's pool and BTCMine - have expected share values that range from above 1.0 to below 1.0, so if you mine when expected share values are higher and cease mining when they are lower you earn more than expected. This is called pool hopping, and the extra coins the pool hopper earns comes from the pockets of full time miners. It is also why you shouldn't mine at proportional pools - unless you know how much pool hoppers take from the pool and don't mind losing a few percent.

Yes, I was implying PPS = fees for the pool, which is why DGM will come out ahead in the long run.